This is not WG mail list (right now), therefore reference to 2418 and 3934
as primary ones in regards to management and actions are not appropriate
at this time.
Also to enable new rules/regulations rough consensus needs to exist to
do it, not the other way around as you put it.
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, Dave Crocker wrote:
Folks,
Based on some public discussion on the IETF mailing list and some quick
web page assemblage, there is now an explicit statement of the rules for
this mailing list.
The rules are located at:
<http://mipassoc.org/mass/ietf-list-rules.html>
This note is both an assertion of the rules and a request for any
indication of rough consensus AGAINST them.
As an assertion, this email serves the equivalent to the IPR "NOTE WELL"
statement used in the IETF. That is, it ensures that all participants are
informed of the rules that are in force.
Note that the rules strictly involve IETF standard documents, so that
there is absolutely nothing special about applying them to this group.
If there is rough consensus NOT to use these rules, it is not clear
under what rules the list will operate, to satisfy IETF requirements.
The rules impose requirements on all participants and they specify
courses of actions when there are problems.